California High-Speed Rail Authority v. United States Department of Transportation, et al.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED RAIL No. 2:25-cv-02004-DAD-CKD

AUTHORITY,

12 Plaintiff, 13 ORDER DIRECTING THE FILING OF v. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING 14 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF (Doc. No. 15) 15 TRANSPORTATION, et al.,

16 Defendants. 17 18 This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction. (Doc. No. 19 15.) The parties are directed to file joint or separate supplemental briefing addressing the 20 following issues: 21 1. Whether the court must rely on the full administrative record in ruling on plaintiff’s 22 motion for preliminary injunction. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 23 U.S. 402, 420 (1971) (“[I]t is necessary to remand this case to the District Court for 24 plenary review of the Secretary’s decision. That review is to be based on the full 25 administrative record that was before the Secretary at the time he made his decision.”); see 26 also American Bioscience, Inc. v.…